But if I had to build a D1 college basketball team, the guy I want for my anchor is the guy who has an MUA at his position every game, even when he only brings his B game.

Brandon Rush is the only guy on this list, even if you include Sim, that held MUA at his starting position, the 3, every game his last season.

On the blocks, Simien, at the 4/5, was just short enough to run into guys bigger than he was, though not stronger, and he just was not a step out 43% trey shooter either; that meant him being your anchor assured you of at least a few games where your anchor lacked clear MUA. With Rush as your anchor, every game he had the edge going in.

Even Hinrich, as terrific as he was, could run into guys at his positions, 1 and 2, that were even up with him.

Collison, as terrific as he was, could run into guys stronger and bouncier than he was.

Gooden was the great disappointment, because he had the tools to hold MUA at his position, the 4, every game of every season. But Drew, as terrific as he was, could never lose the wildness and be a true MUA every game.

Rush is the only guy on this list that held decisive MUA every healthy game he ever played.

The knock on Brandon was that he often disappeared, but he only disappeared offensively and, even then, he only disappeared offensively on teams that Self wanted equal scoring distribution on. When Self said carry the team offensively as a freshman, Brandon did not disappear offensively. When Self said carry the team defensively, help the posts rebound, lock your wing man down, and whenever someone else is getting lit up, go lock that guy down, too, Brandon never, never, never failed to oblige Self. Brandon Rush never disappeared defensively. He just got bored offensively sometimes, because Self wanted so many guys involved Rush's last two seasons.

When I ask your question, I come up with Brandon, not Wayne.

When I lose Brandon, I lose not only MUA every game at the 3, I lose the third greatest, most versatile, on-ball and help defender that ever played at KU short of Wilt Chamberlain and Danny Manning. I lose my man who can go lock-down, or at least slow down, any guy from the 1 to 4 positions short of Kevin Durant, and even give Durant some trouble. I also lose a 43% trey shooter. I also lose a cool, unflappable player who spreads his cool to the rest of the team and keeps it from getting rattled.

When I lose Wayne, I lose money on the blocks, and ferocious competitor, and one of the strongest, most athletic guys, pound-for-pound, that ever played for KU outside Chamberlain and Manning. But at the position he played for Self, when he really blossomed, he invariably ran into a few guys down the stretch that he was even up with, or guys that could at least equalize his muscle edge.

As always, the Coach knows best, and you and Self like Simien the best, so, if I'm lacing up the tennies for either of you guys to go hunt for a ring, then I would abide by your picks and play whatever roles you assigned me (jock washer, no doubt) with out doubt or hesitation.

But if I were the coach, Brandon Rush is still the first guy on this list, even with Sim added, that I want to build a college basketball team around.

Post Script: And if Self had played through Brandon the way he played through Simien, Brandon would easily have averaged 20-25ppg.

Great analysis Jaybate. In retrospect I think Self learned a big lesson after the 2005 season was over: playing through a monster five feet from the goal is great, but having different game plans is great too...

Seems like the offense really opened up after Wayne left & it really benefitted everyone, especially the '08 team, which ended up bringing more big guys outside the arc to set pick & rolls & pick slips than any other team in the history of college basketball, which of course allowed more deadly shooters like Brandon coming off of curls on the opposite side of the offensive set to receive more open looks than we had seen in quite sometime at Kansas.

Very ironic as it took the pain of Bucknell to allow 2008's playbook & personel to happen. But it was, really, the summer of 2005 where this 2008 championship started to unfold... In round table meetings amongst the best collegiate coaching staff in America:

"As great as Wayne was.... Could our formula have been a little off in the spring of 2005?"

"With this new recruiting grand slam coming in... Do we want to fall on the sword THAT way again? Was Wayne as incredible as we thought? Or was it our system that failed this 2005 team in the end?"

I believe, very strongly, the VCU loss will do the same for us.

When we do get another Brandon Rush type, you can guarantee he won't allow right handed shooters to even dribble with their right hand in a future elite 8, much less get a clean look from the right side of their body.

I really hope Self studies that tape. I believe he will. Defensive strategy lost that game.

And, after studying the tape, when we get another Brandon Rush type Self will again leverage for the most important part of Jayhawk basketball, even more important than Wayne Simienesque high percentage shots....

But Rush and Chalmers are the only ones in this group with game big enough to win a national championship.

It is a dead heat between Rush and Chalmer, because both were such marvelous players.

My heart says Chalmers, because he made "the shot" on top of playing superbly, and he's the only one playing with Lebron and Wade.

My head says Rush, because he really was the King of the KU Cool Jazz Quintet and because whenever Chalmers got in over his head defensively, or Julian, or anyone on the team, Rush got assigned to his man.

A couple of observations..The single most outstanding play in 2008 was made by Sherron, the play before the greatest shot.
Sherron left KU as the winningest in KU history.
Sherron, Robinson and Chalmers were the best guard combo in KU history..on both ends of the court.
Combo..not individual.
Back to '03..Kirk (my choice) and Nick, KU had back-to-back final fours..
We executed Roy's game plan perfectly and shut down Warrick, leaving Melo as their #1 option.
If we could have made a lousy 16-30 at the free throw line..the melo mystic would never have been.
We had just beaten a far superior Wade from Marquette.
But..it didn't hapoen.
I'm not disagreeing w/you but this is far to subjective..I went with my heart.
Simien would have been my choice but injuries held him back.
If Gooden stayed his final year..he could have won.

These things are fun but too many variables, imo, to pick a 'winner'.
I'll just go w/the consensus and say Nick! You da man!

Kirk was a great, great player. Heck, he lit up the NBA for several seasons. You don't need to hate to disagree with me on this Looking at this list of players, a good case can be made for any one of them. As I said above to 100, Drew Gooden probably had the most awesome physical ability of any of them. He was so incredibly talented that he could play wild as a March Hare and still deserve to be on the floor. Kirk Hinrich is one of my all time favorites. Most probably won't agree with me on this, but I think Kirk would have been even more dominant playing for Self than he was for Roy. Kirk got to exploit his incredible speed with Roy's fast break game, it is true. But Kirk could guard like nobody's business, and frankly shoot the trifecta beyond anyone on this list, when he wasn't playing point. I suspect Self would probably have played Kirk at the 2 to maximize his trifecta and his defense, the way Self did with Chalmers. Kirk would have impacted all over the court offensively for Self and his defense, especially his strips, would have been stunning in Okie Ball.

So I can live with a case for Kirk.

I can live with a case for Simien, or Chalmers, too.

I think Chalmers subordinated his game substantially to Rush's cool jazz style. Chalmers shows in the pros that can really play fiery in the NBA.

'I think Kirk would have been even more dominant playing for Self than he was for Roy'

jaybate..I'm biting my tongue so hard I drew blood.
Back to back Final Fours..one more than Self..of course Self actually won one at KU.
But look at Jeremy Case. What could he have done differently to have had better success for Self? I think he would have been a far better player w/Roy.
Padgett, Simien, Wilkes et al were recruited by these coaches on how well they would fit into the style (systems is way over used) of the coach that signed them.

Scot Pollard deserves an award for something I have no idea what it should be.

Nick Collison probably had more huge games his last season than anyone else on this list. I mean there is no other guy on this list who played a couple games, one especially, where everyone in the field house just shook their heads in awe at the performance he put on in a big game, under the bright lights. Nick could flat out play the game. He's so good, that like Danny Manning, even with injuries, he can just keep hanging on finding roles to play in the NBA. Nick was our best big since Danny, all things considered, though Simien was probably the better offender game in and game out, and Marcus more versatile, and Drew the most physically gifted, of all. Put Wayne's, or Nick's mind, in Drew's body and you've got Danny Manning. But then again, that was why Danny Manning was so special. He had it all in one package. And a father who had taught the whole big man game to him. And one of the most cunning coaches ever. In Wayne's and Nicks and Drew's defense, each one of them lacked something of what Manning had, and so each had to be the best they could be with some disadvantage, in comparison to Danny. And this is why in these sorts of comparisons, it is always wise to make clear that they were all great players making the most of what they had to work with, even Drew. They were all great players that accomplished huge amounts. No doubt if Drew could have gotten the wildness under control, he would have; that was just a card in the deck he was not dealt. Same as Wilt would have become a great free throw shooter, if he could have. It was just a card in the deck he was not dealt. Brandon could not always concentrate hard enough offensively to impact every game, even though he had the MUA. Nick was not given the balletic athleticism that some of the others were. Kirk had all the goods, but he was not flat out physically superior to every player he played against--most but not all. You have to see these guys as human, with flaws, and human emotions, to really appreciate how great they were. Any Greek god could handle them one on one any time. Any comic book super hero could lock them down. But among mere humans, humans with feet of clay, humans that make mistakes and lose their ways and have to work hard, hard, hard to get back on track from time to time, these guys were just awesome human beings!

thank you oakville, that was my thought also....CHALMERS SHOOTS!!! OOOOO!!!!
but i didn't vote for just "marios miracle"....i felt he brung it every night game in game out...Offense and Defense......specially in all the big games.

I voted for Chalmers because his stats are right there w/ wveryone else, but most importantly, when the game mattered the most, he showed up the biggest. And I'm not just talking about the championship game, but you cannot overlook it nor overstate it. USC at USC that year comes to mind right off the top. A great player who played even bigger on the biggest stages and that is the criteria for my vote

My criteria, and I know it's weak, was who gave us four years? Between Kirk and Nick, it was tough. Kirk, an all around game, Nick the strong inside presence, that great footwork!
Drew would have been a part of another national championship team had he stayed another year, no doubt in my mind. I wish he'd seen the big picture, although I understand the big bucks of the NBA as well.
Mario I think would be at the top of the list for me had he stayed. We could have won back to backs had he, Brandon and Darrell stuck around!
So again, it's kind of a weak criteria for choosing the all time best of the decade, but KU would have two more national championships had 3 guys on this list stuck around for another year.
Oh well, it's a weak lament because it's great to be a Jayhawk!

Chalmers! The guy had ice in his veins...he was clutch the entire 2007-08 season (not just the National Championship game...remember his performance against Texas in the Big 12 championship game?)! Not to mention the guy played stellar defense and had the ability to steal the ball at any given time!

He "should" have played one more year at KU, but honestly, how many of us would turn down the chance to play in the NBA while our draft stock is through the roof? His draft stock couldn't have been much higher than it was when he got drafted. It was a smart move on his part to go pro (although I, like most of you, would have loved to watch him play out his senior year at KU).

Don't get me wrong though; I don't think you can go wrong by picking any of the other four on the list. And yes, Wayne Simien totally got snubbed.

Too hard to decide with my head so I'm goin with my heart. Maybe it's because I was younger and more impressionable when he played, but my heart says my favorite KU player of the decade...is Kirk Hinrich.

It is a difficult decision. Statistically, Hinrich and Collison are better, but remember, these are all offensive statistics and KU under Williams was more of an offensive power. Injuries are part of the games, so I cannot vote for someone on what might have happened if they were healthy. For me, it came down to performance in big games. I will always remember Collison for the monster game he had against UT at AFH, but I remember him more, unfortunately, for all the missed free throws in the National Championship game against Syracuse. If just hit half of his free throws, KU probably wins that game. I loved the 2008 team because they had no superstar, but voted to Mario Chalmers because of the way he performed in the clutch.

When looking at a KU player for the decade I feel it behooves us to look at those players who actually spent all four years in a 'Hawk uniform.

Granted, Rush had an extra year due to an injury, which gave him three years. If not for the injury he would have been done after two.

I also feel that selection should also be based on how well these individuals represented themselves in their post-years. Kirk and Nick have been exemplary on the court and off of the court and DID complete their college eligibility at KU. I love the 'Hawks and the players associated with the program, but Kirk and Nick stand far and above the others through their demeanor by being excellent role models to all present and future JayHawks. Two very fine young men for our future contingent to emulate! RCJH

If Wayne Simien were on this list he would easily get my vote. Had he not been injured for the 2003 game against Syracuse, KU easily wins that game. Of the 5 to choose from though, I would have to go with Hinrich because my facebook profile picture is a picture of myself with Hinrich on the night his jersey was retired against Missouri.

An important item of note. When he made the shot I had already walked outside and accepted defeat, cursing myself for being a fan... I missed the live shot. My wife walked outside and calmly said, "it's going to overtime Dynamite... You, idiot." Since then I've used memory suppression techniques. My subconscious actually believes that I was sitting next to Mark Mangino went the shot went down. But I digress: Chalmers. No question.

I can see arguments for any of the three major candidates on this list... Drew being the spot 5, is not a slap to Wayne Simien it's just an unfair knock at our supremely talented 4 position the last 10 years.

I love Chalmers and Chalmer's has Bling that Nick and Kirk cannot claim.

Rush was so good at half offense that he still was the teams leader most games.

And Kirk is the most underrated Jayhawk on this list, IMHO.

But....

Nick Collison is the prototypical forward I would want to have for a college player, decent athleticism, Tremendous basketball IQ, and great motor. You cannot compare these guys via position....

You remove the Kirk from those teams and Collison still performs to a high level, I'm not sure we can say the same the other way ( that's spliting hairs here.... but Kirk was sometimes erratic from distance and Nick was nearly automatic.... )

Collison didn't have different gears like Rush..... Collison just locked on to the moment and played aggressively forward, where sometimes Rush would defer or forget his abilities.

Mario... is hands down the most clutch player on this list. His defensive and offensive skill sets were off the chart. He knocked down clutch shots that Lebron only dreams of making. That said, Mario wasn't ever really considered the best player on his team ( fairly or unfairly ) Both were unassuming, both were amazing respresentatives of Kansas Basketball..... While one has the ring, the other has some seemingly unbelievable accomplishments.... but I can never remember Mario having a double double, while Nick was a double double every night.... I also cannot remember Mario being over 25 points ( though I'm sure it had to have happened..... ) and I can remember nights where Nick could have gone for 40 if Roy had let him.

Again, there is no doubt that 4 of these guys are all VERY VERY solid picks, but to me It's Nick Collison.

Right on. Nick was Mr. Automatic, which is why he will lose in this poll. You just took him for granted night in, night out. He never made any hair raising dunks or beat his chest after a huge play, (ahperse actually, probably holds Nick in contempt for his lack of expression.) he just ran back on defense... automatic. And he did it for more games than any other guy on the list.

I didn't even put much thought into my vote. Nick was my top player when the whole "All Decade Team" started. Automatic.

KGphoto +1. Mr Double-Double. Old School Forward4 Prowess. Iowa-2-Kansas Ethic. Four Year Man. Represents KU Then and Now. Made Kirk Better. Wonder what would have happened if he was tested with HC change like Wayne was?

Wayne has never been so sure of himself as a player. Even more recently he's reinvented himself through the church. Injuries always seemed like an excuse. Like he never really wanted it. I like Wayne, but he never really proved himself to me. He had tons of potential and ability and all the right intentions. He just didn't want to be a basketball player after all.

Nick seems so at peace with who he is, and who he is as a player. I think that lends itself to incredible consistency, and at the college level seeing incredible consistency for 4 years is gone.

This is a multi-dimensional player who has good stats and in clutch situations you would want to take the shot. Mario was also an elite thief who regularly got big stops through a timely steal. He played loose and he played smart. Hard to ask more.

For those of you who think that Gooden doesn't deserve to be a finalist I hope you are aware that he was the 2002 runner up for the Naismith POY and was the NABC co-POY. He was the best weapon in this decade for KU by far!! However, I still don't think he earns the honor of being the best Jayhawk of the decade because that honor easily goes to Collison, who was the 03 NABC POY, played in more games than Gooden, and not to mention had one of the most memorable games against Texas; where even KU hating Dick Vitale gave Collision a standing ovation. Who cares how these players did in the NBA! The vote is for best KU player. Collison hands down!!

Personally, If there was a top 10 0r 15 I think Drew is a lock. the problem is.... Thomas Robinson, Wayne Simien, Cole Aldrich, Both Morri's, Darrell Arthur and Darnell jackson all share the same spot. And that's forgetting how Invaluable players like Sherron Collins were...... This is a Difficult thing to do, but frankly.... Give me any of them over Drew, they all stayed longer than Drew with glaring exception of Shady and he had a ring when he left.......

Our post players this past decade have been a testament to the COaching of two great coaches with two contrasting styles..... In football they call certain universities by their propensity to make consistant impact players from one (some multiple ) positions.....

We are a blue blood in basketball and these last two decades have proven time and time again.... Stretching back to Danny, and going for as far as Basketball should take us...... We have the best bigs in College Basketball BAR NONE.

With or without a 4 yr prerequisite, IMO, it's gotta be Wayne. He largely carried his teams on his shoulders, even missing as many games with injuries as he did. I'd say Nick 2nd & Brandon 3rd. Tough pick though, I'm awfully proud of Mario. If Brandon had stayed 4 yrs it would likely be a tossup with Dub. So I'm a no-voter on this one. Hard to imagine Wayne not in the mix. Also, I have to agree with wayward j on his take of Drew in top 10 or 15, but not top 5. JMO

I think you hit the nail on the head here. For me, Wayne missed so many games because of injury, I just can't say "he's the best."
He could've been the best, if he hadn't been injured...just like Rush could've been the best if he "had stayed 4 yrs."
If we're counting players who were injured "in" and players who didn't stay all four years "out," where's the consistency in our consideration?
Granted, I believe Wayne had some big disadvantages...injuries, the coaching change.
But all and all, I have to go with Nick. That game in AFH against Texas where he fouled out...I mean, that just sums it up for me. Nick, IMO was the best player of the last decade.

its interesting that the player of the decade and the majority of the decade team are Roys players. I have too agree with the results though, hinrich, collision and drew gooden were awesome. It doesnt seem that long ago that i was watching all three playing on the same team. How did they not win the championship that year over Maryland?

I was gonna criticize this vote because Collison went 3-10 from the line vs. syracuse... but then I looked at discovered that kirk was 3-12 from the 3 point line in the same game. Jeff Graves had 11 offensive rebounds in that game. 11!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! In fact the team had 15 more than syracuse, yet only put up 8 more shots than them... with the same number of turnovers. Number of freethrows that collison and langford missed: 13. number of threes that kirk missed: 9. They were 11-18 from 3, and ku was 4-20. I don't think you could replay the game 100 times and get those numbers.

in 1953 we lost the ncaa championship game by one point, in 1957 we lost the title in triple overtime again by just one point. yeah in 2003 we lost the championship by 3 points. Get this, 5 points is what separates us from having 3 more NCAA titles. instead of just having 3, the number would double to six all because of five points!

Sincerely not trying to nit-pick, but unless playing for ties, we would have needed to cover the deficit and then topped it by 1 pt to win = 2 + 2 + 4 = 8 pts to win and not just tie in those 3 games, unless I am misunderstanding your post.

my bad i forgot the points that we needed to win and not just tie those games. If you want further info, the 1953 team was beaten by Indiana and the triple overtime game was when we had wilt chamberlain and played against McGuire's north carolina sqad... Ku has played in 8 national championship games with the first one being in 1940 (where indiana beat us by a score of 60-42). Of course we were also national champions in 1922 and 1923. Yeah Ku has some incredible history, we were prominent for some time even before Kentucky or north carolina.

Very, very difficult to objectively pick a "Player of the Decade" with the kind of talent that we've had here. I personally voted for Kirk, but I can definitely live with Nick Collison. He was a great player, a great young man and represented KU extremely well during his time here.

as much as i love collison and there were alot of Games that we won due to him like that Texas game where he was hitting the glass like a beast. But i could not put him #1 cause of his performance in the championship game against the orangeman. in the 2nd half they fouled him mostly and repeatedly he came up short i'm not saying the loss was all his fault but he was a senior and the team need him and he didnt come thru thats wht he didny get my vote. When we had someone on the list who during the biggest college game came up big and hit the shot that virtually won the game. We all know that the tigers had no chance of winning after Rio hit that 3... That is why chalmers Got my vote for POTD(player of the decade) and there were plenty of games where he won as well like the Big 12 championship Game where he hit the 3 at the end. and when he out dualed Derant.

Keep in mind, though, that there's a lot of luck involved in college hoops. If Memphis makes one more free throw in '08, and if Syracuse makes one less circus trey in '03, Nick becomes the hero and Mario and co. become goats.

This is like walking into the Playboy Mansion and being asked which one is better looking. All of them are great, it comes down to a matter of taste in deciding which is the best. Chalmers is my choice because of the shot in the championship game but he was also consistent the whole season and career. The others on the list were also great during their careers and had memorable moments also. We have all been fortunate to have players like this representing the Jayhawks over the last decade. Could you imagine the debate if LJW decided to do an all century team? Rock On Jayhawks!! Looking forward to the coming season and the next round of Jayhawks to debate about for the next All Decade Team.

Glad to see that most agreed a 4 yr guy was "the man". My first instinct was Nick or Brandon, but after the google research decided on Wayne. So again, I abstained. But what a decade! After Roy who would've imagined it could even be better? Now men, let's get this hot, boring a$$ed summer out of the way & get down to the real nuts & bolts.

I could live with anyone winning this except for Gooden. And even then, I'd have a hard time really getting upset.

Collison and Hinrich both are deserving because of back-to-back Final Fours. Because both of them, at multiple points in their careers, did the whole Carry-The-Team-To-Victory-On-My-Back act. Hinrich did it against Arizona in the Elite Eight. Collison did it against Texas in the regular season and Duke in the Sweet Sixteen. I can't fault the two of them for their struggles in the Syracuse game because they carried the team more than Rush or Chalmers ever did in any individual game.

Chalmers and Rush, on the other hand are both deserving because of their National Title. Because both of them were ideal Bill Self players. Excellent defenders who could get their offense going in the most crucial moments with a big shot. On any given night, they were each tasked with guarding the opposing team's positions that are often the most athletic and offensively versatile (shooting guard and small forward).

Gooden certainly had the most raw talent and athleticism out of the five (imho), but I have to dock him, even if minutely, for leaving early after his two uber-talented classmates (Collison, Hinrich) returned to address unfinished business. Plus, he wore a neck-beard for many years in the NBA. That has to count (negatively) for something.

I could live with anyone winning this except for Gooden. And even then, I'd have a hard time really getting upset.

Collison and Hinrich both are deserving because of back-to-back Final Fours. Because both of them, at multiple points in their careers, did the whole Carry-The-Team-To-Victory-On-My-Back act. Hinrich did it against Arizona in the Elite Eight. Collison did it against Texas in the regular season and Duke in the Sweet Sixteen. I can't fault the two of them for their struggles in the Syracuse game because they carried the team more than Rush or Chalmers ever did in any individual game.

Chalmers and Rush, on the other hand are both deserving because of their National Title. Because both of them were ideal Bill Self players. Excellent defenders who could get their offense going in the most crucial moments with a big shot. On any given night, they were each tasked with guarding the opposing team's positions that are often the most athletic and offensively versatile (shooting guard and small forward).

Gooden certainly had the most raw talent and athleticism out of the five (imho), but I have to dock him, even if minutely, for leaving early after his two uber-talented classmates (Collison, Hinrich) returned to address unfinished business. Plus, he wore a neck-beard for many years in the NBA. That has to count (negatively) for something.

I really, really don't know how people think that if Simien had played in the national championship game, that KU would have automatically won. It's implying that Simien would have played better than Graves did that day, and Graves was absolutely fantastic that day. There's also the chance that Collison would not have been quite so effective with another offensive player. All I know is that between Collison and Graves, we got 35 points on 15-27 shooting and 37 total rebounds, 19 offensive rebounds. The front court gave the team a chance. We lost because 1) Hinrich, Lee, and Miles combined for 9-33 w/ only 1 FT attempt, 2) Collison, Langford, and Graves combined for 10-27 from the line, or because 3) Gerry McNamara had one for the ages. Simien doesn't somehow win the championship for us, and I'm actually of the opinion that the bruising power game that Graves brought to Kansas actually got them to that game in the first place. I'm not sure if Kansas beats Arizona without Graves that year.

In any case, with Graves instead of Simien, Roy played a slightly slower, more deliberate paced game, which I ultimately think was a good thing. It maximized the abilities of the players like Collison and Langford, which allowed a razor thin squad to maximize its ability and for once, outperform their expectations. For once, a Roy squad was tough and not easily rattled. I don't look back on '03 and think of it as a missed opportunity or anything like that. Simien was a great player, but who knows what he would have brought to that team in March, and I wouldn't change a thing about that '03 team. Easily one of my favorites. Played with heart.

I don't necessarily agree that Roy's teams were soft, but that was indeed his toughest squad, with all the adversity they went through. I wish Self had gotten as much out of Graves in '04 as Roy did in '03.

i voted for Kirk...but Nick winning is fine with me. i was at the game when he went for 24 and 21, or whatever the ridiculous combo number it was points-rebounds vs. UT....he was a complete beast.

back to back FFs...those guys should've won a national title in one of those years.....we forgot to play D vs. Maryland...and we really missed Simien in the tourney that year. i disagree with the poster just above....it's precisely because Simien was out, that our depth was so limited in the tourney...we finally ran out of gas in the final. With Simien, he would have put us over the top, minute wise. but the debate will always continue.

Kirk and Nick haven't been All stars much in their NBA careers, but they're valuable players, and are good teammates. maybe they can still find their way to an NBA title someday. congrats to both of them on their great efforts and outstanding careers at Kansas.

Maybe we ran out of gas because we were too busy trying to embarrass Marquette? It wasn't lack of gas that let McNamara drill 6 threes in the first half and put Kansas in a hole either. Syracuse put together a first half for the ages.

It's March. People with hearts as big as that '03 team don't run out of gas. We had enough energy to annihilate Wade & Co. a couple days before, we had enough energy to show up to the Syracuse game.

We all need to accept the fact that Kansas just wasn't good enough that day. They played below average that day, and Syracuse played above average, and the margin was three points. Simien doesn't automatically win that game for Kansas. Lee's shot probably wouldn't have gone in. I know we all want to find a silver lining, but the only one worth talking about is just how tough those guys were and just how much heart they showed.

Interesting results. It would appear that the voter have a greater fondness for the Williams era than the Self era. Staying the entire four years is definitely relevent, but by almost every measure the Bill Self era has been more successful than the Roy Williams era which is saying alot.

As an old timer who went to school during the Ted Owens era, I can tell you that KU basketball is where it is today primarily because of Roy Williams and I will always be appreciative of that. Sure, Larry Brown won the National Championship, but where was the program heading? Danny Manning was gone, Larry Brown was gone and probation was coming. Very few coaches could have done what Roy did. He not only kept KU competitive, he elevated the program to it's perennial Top 10 status.

Look at Indiana today and observe their stuggles. That easily could have been KU in the early 1990s. I don't know what impresses me most: Williams elevating the program or Self taking an elevated program to even higher levels.

Your 1st sentence in the 3rd paragraph......makes the overall point. we weren't good enough because we didn't have all the parts. of course we won't ever know....but you're going to seriously tell me that Simien wouldn't have made a major difference throughout the whole year? you think we would have lost to Marquette? we probably beat them by 50 with Simien. (we were a terrible matchup for Marquette...they didn't have a prayer against us....Simien present, only makes it worse)

we essentially played six players in the tourney....six. so forgive me, Simien gives us seven...and a third big, so Keith or Michael Lee don't have to play the four spot. that my friend, would have been a huge advantage for us....and Graves would have given us energy off the bench.

my "ran out of gas" theory is completely valid. FTs son, FTs. 12-30...Collison, 3-13. has Nick Collison EVER gone 3-13 in his life? i doubt it....and it doesn't have anything to do with the cakewalk, blowout semifinal....a six man lineup for essentially...three months. the pressure, the intensity, the will to win...caught up with us physically.

and it's a great testament to our conditioning, quality of play and coaching...that we whittled down the deficit so much, and had a chance to win it at the end. i remember that game...Syracuse got tired too. there was a stretch in the 2nd half, where it was painful to watch..neither team could execute anything.

like i said before, Collison and Hinrich were good enough as a duo to win a title...it just didn't quite happen. based on probably the numbers game in '03, and coaching lack of preparation in '02...(Maryland was a tough matchup for us...but we really played terrible D in that game.) we couldn't do it. but it takes nothing away from the value and high quality play of Collions and Hinrich throughout their careers at Kansas. they were magnificent.

Simien was also an 80% free throw shooter. He wasn't a bomber from outside, but the guy had a really smooth stroke. Do we win, do we not? Who knows, but one thing is certain, in the history of the game there is no college team that would not be better with a Wayne Simien on the roster.

Collison finished 2nd in career points, and 3rd in rebounds and 37 career double doubles. He also had some pretty big games in the '03 tourney run probably having the biggest against Duke with 33 and 19, he had 12 and 15 against Marquette but he sat most of the game due to a blow out and finished his career at KU with 19 and 21 boards which is 2nd most in NCAA title game history. He also held Melo to only 2 points after switching over to him the 2nd half after he had 18. If the team makes atleast 3 free throws we probably win yes, but we didnt. There is an argument for Chalmers and Rush because they won a title but watching games and games they just never seemed to be under control and never hit shots they should have (wide open jumpers) They won a title!!!!!!! But........
My Team:
PG Hinrich
SG Boschee
SF Langford
PF Collison
C Gooden
Keith stood 6-4 and played like he was 6-8 always getting to the rim and could knock down the mid range jumper with pretty good consistency. He was so quick and just went around guys to finish at the rim which I felt Rush never did, nor Xavier. Though Keith was in the SG bracket he was the best SF of the decade because of his consistency. Rush played more of a SG because he just shot outside most of the time and never really slashed like he should have even though he was 6-6 and XAVIER. Ouch. Same comparison to Keith because of the Left hand. Never ever ever drove the rim and again was 6-6 remember Keith was listed 6-4 even though he might have been 6-3 and played huge jumping all over the place getting rebounds and dunking. BEST SF OF THE DECADE.

Boschee... Graduated as the All-Time leader in 3 point makes in the Big 12 (Now A.J. Abrams)

Keith remains my favorite player to be a jayhawk even though Collison was probably the best. (Decade)